Wow! How insensitive, Meredith! You blind partisans sure know how to make yourselves and your parties look good! If I were you, I would apologize for that comment immediately. Or at the very least, you could apologize for how your “words were misconstrued.”

Darren

It would appear that the heaviest element on the Periodic Table is Sean.

Who pays you to publish your opinions? I’d like to know because I want to ask for a refund. Honestly, how Michael Brodkorb makes a living is none of your business. I commend Michael for disclosing that information, but I also don’t think it’s prudent on his part knowing that Minnesota bloggers on the left don’t disclose where they get money from.

Did you put the NRCC on your Disclosure page before or after the election?

Sean

I’ve been hired by the following campaigns/political parties for opposition research and press consulting in 2006:

* Michele Bachmann for Congress – August 2006
* NRCC – August 2006
* Mark Kennedy for U.S. Senate – July to November 7, 2006
* Republican Party of Minnesota – October 30 – November 7, 2006

Sean, is there an adult in the room that can help you with this?

“Michael Brodkorb of Minnesota Democrats Exposed. The Senate campaign of Rep. Mark Kennedy, R-Minn., has paid Brodkorb nearly $4,600 a month for press consulting since May, he said in a telephone interview. He also received one-time payments of $5,500 each this year from GOP House candidate Michele Bachmann and the National Republican Congressional Committee. He offered press advice to Bachmann and did opposition research for the NRCC.”

Is this a good example of your ethics Mike?

Sean

Sean

http://www.opensecrets.org/parties/expenddetail.asp?txtName=MICHAEL+BRODKORB&Cmte=NRCC&cycle=2006

Wild. Your disclosure page accurate Mike?

Sean

Each of the things you say are not on that page are listed very plainly and clearly.

Repeating over and over again that the information isn’t there won’t make it disappear, and certainly won’t make it so that it never existed.

Were you dispatched by the people who are demanding MDE’s liberal counterparts quit linking to him? Were you dispatched to pretend to be four years old today?

You make sensible, well reasoned comments every so often Sean. But this display should be embarrassing for you.

Sean

Sean

Really? Because as of right now it’s not listed on his disclosure page.

And BTW Mike– I saw this on your disclosure page:

“I believe there are liberal bloggers with undisclosed professional connections to campaigns. I know there are liberal bloggers who fail to post disclaimers on posts discussing their clients. I strongly believe there are numerous nervous liberal bloggers tonight who are worried about similar posts attacking their lack of disclosure. Don’t worry, you won’t be reading any posts attacking you Minnesota Democrats Exposed.”

http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2007/02/21/franken-event-draws-large-crowd-in-mankato-mn-publius-blogger-works-for-frankens-campaign

Funny.

Meredith– Go bugger off. I’ll leave when Mike asks me to, or when I chose not to come any more.

But I’d really appreciate if he answered A or B.

Sean

Why don’t you follow the directions of your central committee and act like the little lemming that you are and quit posting on this site. You need to follow your party.

After calling me an ugly idiot, and saying I “are the the worst debater in MN.”

I think that you calling me the worst debater in MN is up in the air.

Mike– that doesn’t answer whether or not you’ve only been paid by the Campaign For St. Paul’s Future, Michelle Bachmann, Mark Kennedy and breifly for the RPM for political work since July of 2005. It’s not that hard.

I’ll even make it multiple choice for you.

A. Sean, I have been only been paid by Michelle Bachman, the Campaign For St. Paul’s Future, Mark Kennedy, and very briefly by the RPM for political activities including but not limited to opposition research and press consulting since July of 2005.

B. Sean, I have been paid by more than just Michelle Bachman, The Campign for St. Paul’s Future, Mark Kennedy and the RPM for political activities including but not limited to opposition research and press consulting since July of 2005.

So, which is it, A or B?

Sean

Are non-sequiturs the only tool you liberal cowards have at your disposal?

The bottom line is: Ritchie lied about Michael being an employee of the Republican Party. What that has to do with the rest of Sean’s horse shit, I’ll never know.

Pull your head out man.

Then again who really reads their drivel anyhow?

Jon-David is just so easy to upset and fluster it almost makes you feel sad for the little fella. Matt I hear is just an egomaniac who again fits the classic keyboard warrior stereotype.

Both wish they had half the credibility of MDE.

JD and Matt are both MN Publius until they let us know he was not. And they (being Publius) were posting Franken material.

Please tell me you don’t work in either the political, legal, or communications field as are the worst debater in MN.

And that doesn’t change the fact that you were posting about the St. Paul mayors race while a paid political operative.

Sean

You have not recieved any other payments for political work as an opp researcher, or in any other capacity since then?

Sean

Take your head out of Mark Ritchie’s asscheeks for a minute and re-read the record you’ve left in this thread.

Are you ashamed now? If the answer is yes, there may yet be hope; if no re-reference the greeting above

Sean

What is Sean’s obsession with this St. Paul’s future deal, and what is it about the name that doesn’t allow him to read it on the disclosure page.

Sean, it is there. Can you not read that particular line? Or an you not read, period?

And again, why are you obsessed with it?

Unlike you and I dunno– the Campaign for St. Paul’s Future.

Sean

Folks, as I wrote back in September, liberals have no interest in policing liberal bloggers about their lack of disclosure.

Sean

Do we have an accurate count of how many DFL bloggers (MN Publius, etc.) have taken MDE’s link down from their sites since being instructed to?

“You are able to attack me for my work with the Campaign for St. Paul’s Future, because it was publicly disclosed.”

I’ve also posted articles on MDE about my working for the Campaign for St. Paul’s Future.

It’s been disclosed.

“In closing, I will repeat that what my friends in the liberal blogosphere fail to recognize is that since I have chosen to work in politics I can’t hide how I make a living. My life is one big disclosure.

You are able to attack my work for Mark Kennedy, because FEC rules require expenditures to be publicly reported. You are able to see that I was paid a one-time fee from Bachmann’s campaign, because it was publicly reported. You are able to attack me for my work with the Campaign for St. Paul’s Future, because it was publicly disclosed.”

It’s been disclosed – on my page. Last week, another DFLer made similar attack and eventually apologized:

“Michael,

My apologies, I missed the sentence on the Campaign for St. Paul’s Future. I am obviously a liberal idiot.”

[Click here for link]

Now, if you, having incorporated as yourself, contracted your services to Campaign For St. Paul’s Future, it is only on a technicality that you can say that you didn’t work for the Campaign For St. Paul’s future, but rather the company you worked for did.

As well, it’s been widely disseminated that you worked for Weber/Johnson, which you’ve never denied. You just repeat that your disclosure page is accurate. Accurate doesn’t mean complete and accurate doesn’t mean that your “ethics” are anything to spout off about.

Meredith– where is Mike’s tenure as spokesman for the Campaign for St. Paul’s Future? Oh– what you can’t answer that? Then shut up.

Sean

Sean

Ritchie’s comment was inacurate. I am not an employee of the Republican Party of Minnesota.

Sean